Without going to great lengths to establish that there is continuing dissatisfaction with Mitt Romney as the Republican nominee for the presidency, let us play the game of "What If". What if the convention were to somehow become open? Who would you want to be the Republican nominee?

If we were to point out that Romney did not win the support of two-thirds of the primary voters, the reply would be that the process is engineered that way. When there are more than two candidates, one shouldn't be surprised to see a candidate polling much more than a third. That is reasonable. However, it doesn't mitigate the fact that most were not Romney supporters.

We will balance this out in the game of "What If" by placing any of the candidates who ran against Mitt marginally off limits. Participants in the game should not pick Pawlenty, Bachman, Johnson, Huntsman, Paul, Gingrich, Cain, Perry, or Santorum. They have all already lost. We will leave the option open, though, because many believe Romney was aided by the GOP-E, by a complicit media in the tank for him, and by an enormous financial advantage. So, if you absolutely must write-in Bachman's name, then go ahead and do it. (We couldn't really stop you, anyway.)

My criteria for a candidate would be that they be a real conservative. This is the complaint most heard about Romney, that he is a lifelong liberal who governed as a liberal. There is good reason for seeing Romney in this light since just weeks ago he came out in favor of gay couples. Moreover, he announced that at the state level those gay couples should be allowed to adopt children. This is not ancient history. This is recent. Folks might say that Romney has changed here or there, that he's converted to this or that, but the gay couple and gay adoption thing is brand new.

It underscore for those of us who don't support the man that he truly is a radical liberal, and that it's liberalism that's in his bloodstream and not anything that is severely conservative.

So, who would you support if the convention were to open up? If you were a delegate and if Romney announced he was stepping down, to which leader would you turn?

For me, it would have to first be a pro-life candidate. Life is a right and not an issue. Life shouldn't be taken except by due process of law, and that only after one has committed a violation that warrants the death penalty. A pre-born child could never commit such a crime, so no due process could ever make it right to take the life of a pre-born child.

Other minimal requirements would be: pro-God, anti-homosexualism, pro-gun, pro-small government, and pro-American exceptionalism. I could add other qualifications to this list, but we'll just shorten it for the sake of this article.

Who?

Let's just offer a few names that have been brought up as possible Vice Presidential nominees (alphabetically): Tom Corbett, Mitch Daniels, Jim DeMint, Susana Martinez, Sarah Palin, Rand Paul, Rob Portman, Condi Rice, Marco Rubio, Paul Ryan, Rick Snyder, and Alan West. Some of these might or might not fit the requirements I've listed above, but they are a starting list. I'm sure there are others who should be considered. Feel free to add other names.

So, vote now. If the Republican Convention were to suddenly open up, if we suddenly found ourselves rid of Mitt, for whom would you vote to be the nominee of the Republican Party?

You need to change the criteria. I want to hear the name of someone who has not already said no.

Why should we nominate Palin after she refused to run? Is she a special case that she did not have to get out there and make her case? I don't want to hear any conspiracy theories. Palin doesn't consider herself a victim, do not make her into one.

Don't get me wrong, I like Palin, in fact I was one of the very first people here on FR to get behind her in 2008 BEFORE she was nominated.

17
posted on 07/17/2012 5:21:38 AM PDT
by Perdogg
(Let's leave reading things in the Constitution that aren't there to liberals and Dems)

I really don't see what is to be gained by wishing for an alternative in Tampa. I don't see it happening.

Seriously, look at FR - we're tearing each other apart over Romney. The GOP-E at this point probably sees a Romney win in November as icing on the cake of having set the conservative movement upon itself. Why on Earth would they go along with taking out the guy making all this possible?

Now, if Romney wins in November, the conservative base will be so fractured that it might not be able to coalesce back into an effective resistance against RINO socialism and as a means to nominate effective Tea Party alternatives in the 2014 primaries. If 2012 is any indication, we'll shred our own and open the door for the RINO to win the primary.

Can we please realize that the 2012 presidential elections basically are very bad news, no matter who wins between Romney and Obama, that short of something horrific happening to Romney that there is no way he will not be the nominee, and that our battle is to push as many conservatives over the line in down-ticket races?

Do you think it is helpful or honorable to lie and spin for your candidate?

Or do you think it best just to be upfront, dirty laundry and all?

I prefer just letting the truth hang out. That’s always best in the long run. (The same with Mitt and his tax returns. Just release them and deal with it. The same with Obama and his records. Just release them and deal with it.)

The truth shall set us free.

36
posted on 07/17/2012 5:33:03 AM PDT
by xzins
(Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! Those who truly support our troops pray for their victory!)

I prefer not to engage in fruitless Paulbot intellectual exercises that aren’t going to happen. Romney sucks, and it’s going to take a strong GOP majority congress to keep him in line (which means some of you need to get off your lazy whiny asses and help those candidates win), but the difference between Romney and Obama is stark.

It’s this simple: having to keep Romney’s liberal tendencies in check, versus a mental unstable megalomaniac who is attempting to unleash a fascist dictatorship the likes Hitler never dreamed up, one where night and day you are hunted by troops and drones, where most of your community is dead, and if you aren’t your scraping for a few bits of food and water while watching out for the ever present drones. Because I guarantee you Agenda 21 is going to be implemented on his watch.

For you to side with Roberts, who has institutionalized
RomneyCARE/ObamaCARE/DeathPanels and mandates,
and Mr. RomneyCARE, the limp, meek, ALWAYS DEFENSIVE,
pro-Democrat, pro-TARP, author of RomneyCARE/ObamaCARE,
is taking the side of the MSM (who support Romney 24/7
as THEIR CHOSEN LOSER).

You might want to get a cup of coffee and wake up.

49
posted on 07/17/2012 5:38:55 AM PDT
by Diogenesis
("Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. " Pres. Ronald Reagan)

Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.